Re: GOOD READING FOR THE YEW HEAR

[Dan Marotta]

Here we go with "compulsory" again. When will the safety nazis get out
of soaring and let those of us be who enjoy the sport without the
constant whining of the pussies who don't feel "safe" without some
electronic gizmo to lead them down the shining path.

I saw on the news last night about how baseball stadiums are going to be
putting up netting to "protect" spectators from fly balls. Maybe the
fans will stay home to watch baseball on TV, then stadiums and baseball
teams will go broke and the players will have to get real jobs and
baseball will become a sport again that people will play for fun. Just
like gliding should be.

Bring on televised grand prix soaring while I put on my flame suit.

On 12/20/2015 5:25 PM, wrote:
> You can now buy a heads-up-display for your sailplane for as low as $259. Gliding International challenges gilder instrument manufacturers to make their products compatible. This 'heads in the cockpit' eliminator should be compulsory for all sailplanes writes Joseph Carr, the new writer to our competent team at Gliding International.

--
Dan, 5J

[Dan Marotta]

I should add that I would probably acquire and install a well designed
and functional HUD if available, though I would strenuously object to it
being compulsory.

Also, what good is a HUD if you become so dependent upon it that you
don't see the collision coming from outside its field of view? Or we
going to have a sensor suite as in the F-35?

On 12/21/2015 9:14 AM, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Here we go with "compulsory" again. When will the safety nazis get
> out of soaring and let those of us be who enjoy the sport without the
> constant whining of the pussies who don't feel "safe" without some
> electronic gizmo to lead them down the shining path.
>
> I saw on the news last night about how baseball stadiums are going to
> be putting up netting to "protect" spectators from fly balls. Maybe
> the fans will stay home to watch baseball on TV, then stadiums and
> baseball teams will go broke and the players will have to get real
> jobs and baseball will become a sport again that people will play for
> fun. Just like gliding should be.
>
> Bring on televised grand prix soaring while I put on my flame suit.
>
> On 12/20/2015 5:25 PM, wrote:
>> You can now buy a heads-up-display for your sailplane for as low as $259. Gliding International challenges gilder instrument manufacturers to make their products compatible. This 'heads in the cockpit' eliminator should be compulsory for all sailplanes writes Joseph Carr, the new writer to our competent team at Gliding International.
>
> --
> Dan, 5J

--
Dan, 5J

[kirk.stant]

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 10:24:05 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I should add that I would probably acquire and install a well
> designed and functional HUD if available, though I would strenuously
> object to it being compulsory.
>
>
>
> Also, what good is a HUD if you become so dependent upon it that you
> don't see the collision coming from outside its field of view?* Or
> we going to have a sensor suite as in the F-35?

Unless your HUD is collimated at infinity, it doesn't solve the "heads in the cockpit" problem. If you have to focus on a display (either in the cockpit - and I'm thinking in particular at the new fancy varios - or at a transparent display on top of your panel) your ability to see other aircraft effectively disappears until you refocus on some object at long distance (ground, cloud, other glider, etc,). So a non collimated HUD will effectively reduce your ability to see other traffic!

So, can collimated optics be used in a glider? Anybody know if it is physically possible?

Kirk

[David Hirst]

>
> So, can collimated optics be used in a glider? Anybody know if it is physically possible?
>

With the right lenses (in a fairly compact arrangement), it's perfectly feasible to make a HUD image seem like it's at infinite distance or fairly close to it. Try looking through a (straight refractor) telescope with one eye and keeping the other open - if you adjust the focus you'll find a point where both images are clear.

It's then the brain's job to make sense of the overlapping and contradictory images i.e. which image is more important, so you can still suffer from 'object blindness'.

HH
DH

[Paul Agnew]

John,you must have missed my reply on the other thread you started.

What is the subscription fee? I can't find it on your site and am not inclined to fill in all of my information before I can see the rate.

Paul Agnew
Jupiter, FL

[ND]

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 9:48:24 PM UTC-5, Paul Agnew wrote:
> John,you must have missed my reply on the other thread you started.
>
> What is the subscription fee? I can't find it on your site and am not inclined to fill in all of my information before I can see the rate.
>
> Paul Agnew
> Jupiter, FL

100 N.Z.$ per year or, as of yesterday $67 smackaroos.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 9:48:24 PM UTC-5, Paul Agnew wrote:
> John,you must have missed my reply on the other thread you started.
>
> What is the subscription fee? I can't find it on your site and am not inclined to fill in all of my information before I can see the rate.
>
> Paul Agnew
> Jupiter, FL

It was on the web site when I renewed a couple of days ago.
UH